It's a daily occurrence at Draper's Field. Once again the police, this time two very pleasant officers from Glasgow, came to check out an Italian camera crew. We were on the pavement so entirely on public ground. It made no difference! So you can sit on a wall, be on the path inside the perimeter of Draper's Field or on the public pavement outside it, filming or just voice recording, but you will still be stopped. You can even have all the necessary accreditation but they will still come and ask what you are doing. The security guards don't get involved any more after multiple confrontations and being told it's none of their business. Their guy in the control room just calls the police.

Yet again filming in Leyton was interrupted by two police officers, who told us they had been sent by a supervisor to tell us to move off the pathway on the private land that is Draper's Field, a path paid for by the residents of Waltham Forest and open to members of the public to walk up and down on. We were instructed to move onto the pavement which would have caused an obstruction, there was no obstruction where we were, and we ended up on the grass embankment which was of course part of the private Draper's Field. The police just gave up. The sheer stupidity of this operation resulted in footage of intrusive and objectionable security. The Dutch journalist took to filming the array of security cameras which festoon the electrified fence.

Perfect casting for being hoist by his own petard. It's not everybody has their own Petard. The rich fat bastards have all the fun. That's not raw talent you know. They have the breeding you see. And the fagging. That and centuries of de Feffling about on a wet Saturday indoors with the croquet mallets.

by Kevin Blowe

A number of people have asked me to clarify what impact Olympic-specific legislation may have on local people and anyone promoting protests or making political statements during this summer’s Games. Here is a short guide.

photo copyright Giles Price, from The Art of Dissent
by Isaac Marrero-Guillamón

Every other year the Olympic machine lands at a different city, where it nonetheless encounters a familiar scenario: by the night of the opening ceremony all the necessary infrastructures will have been built, free of charge, by the host; all of the city’s advertising space will have been occupied by the official sponsors of the event; state of the art security and military measures will have been deployed to protect the event; high-speed lanes connecting the venues with certain hotels will have been made exclusively available to the convenience of the members of the International Olympic Committee (IOC); and, if everything has gone according to plan, tickets will be long gone and an army of eager volunteers will be at the disposal of the organisers.

Following earlier extraordinary legal decisions, including the acquittal of PC Harwood and the ruling in the High Court that pre-emptive arrests were not unlawful, comes the news that Save Leyton Marsh's application for judicial review of the planning permission for the Basketball Training facility had been thrown out without the applicants even knowing it had been heard. Even more extraordinary was the fact that the ODA had taken over the defence from Waltham Forest, even though it was not the defendant and it had not granted the planning permission. And as if that was not enough the ODA, using public funds of £40million to defend itself, applied for and has been granted an order for costs of £20,142.96, and another £4,140.00 for Waltham Forest, against the Save Leyton Marsh campaigners!

Leyton is becoming a hot spot for security guards harassing camera crews. Another film crew wanted to film the site of the former Clays Lane estate. We were standing on the same steps next to Draper's Field when once again a team of security guards came over to 'question' us about what we were doing. After some banter in which we told them it was none of their business they retired to call the cops.

The Telegraph has a story about an Al Qaeda suspect arrested for being on a train which runs through the Olympic Park. The headline states misleadingly that he was caught 'at the Olympic Park' and the article opens with the statement that 'he was caught crossing through the Olympic Park five times' which left me wondering how he had managed to get into the Park, let alone get across it, so many times, until I got to the bit which mentioned the Overground train journey.

We are told this is the most 'serious security alert' to hit the Olympics so far. The article refers to the 'suspect' and various allegations and accusations that have been made against him and says he 'fled' to Somalia while on bail for which he was later locked up for almost two months. Mixed in with all this are various references to Al Qaeda, Afghanistan, al-Shabaab and jihad. The suggestion seems to be that he fled to re-engage in jihadi activity in Somalia but then the article refers in an aside to his Somali origins and his marriage to a Somali woman which makes Somalia a more obvious place to run to. It manages to mention that the person in question denies involvement in terrorism. However, buried in the middle of the article is the telling statement:

'In his absence he was acquitted of any crime.'

Army guard on tow path

By Brian Whelan

Until two months ago I was happy to have the Olympic stadium next door to my apartment in Bow Quarter, East London – I thought there would be traffic issues but never worried the games would intrude on my life.